About your Search

20121002
20121010
STATION
CSPAN 23
LANGUAGE
English 23
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the vice presidential debate from the 1988 campaign. michael dukakis picked lloyd bentsen of texas. the two candid for about 25 years apart in age, something that provided one of the defining moments. there was held in omaha, neb.. is about one hour and 35 minutes. >> good evening. on behalf of the commission of presidential debates i am pleased to welcome me to the vice presidential debate. i am judy woodruff. my colleagues are tom brokaw of nbc news, and a brit hume of abc news. the importance of tonight the president is underscored by two fax. both george bush and michael bad -- michael dukakis said their running mates would reveal a lot about themselves. based on the history, there is almost a 50-50 chance that one of the men here tonight will become president of the united states. the candidates are senator dan quayle and lloyd bentsen, the democratic nominee. [applause] for the next 90 minutes, we will be questioning the candidates following a format designed and agreed to by representatives of the two campaigns. however, there are america rigid restrictions on the questions my collea
by two facts. both george bush and michael dukakis said their selections of a running mate would reveal a lot about themselves. and based on the history since world war ii, there is almost a 50-50 chance that one of the two men here tonight will become president of the united states. the candidates are senator dan quayle, the republican nominee, and senator lloyd bentsen, the democratic nominee. [applause] >> for the next 90 minutes we will be questioning the candidates following a format designed and agreed to by representatives of the two campaigns. however, there are no restrictions on the questions that my colleagues and i may ask this evening. by prior agreement between the two candidates, the first question goes to senator quayle, and you have two minutes to respond. senator, you have been criticized, as we all know, for your decision to stay out of the vietnam war, for your poor academic record. but more troubling to some are some of the comments that have been made by people in your own party. just last week former secretary of state haig said that your pick was the dumbest call
, "time" magazine's michael scherer. it is 90 minutes. >> good morning and welcome to the new america foundation. my name is mark schmitte. --schmitt, and i am a senior fellow at the new america foundation. we have pulled together a good panel on what is really going on with money and politics in 2012. we call it "beyond sticker shock," because the idea is to get just the basic idea of that it is a big amount of money. when i first got involved in this issue of in 1996, i was working on the hill. i remember writing this whole session. that begins to seem like the line from dr. evil's demand for $1 million. we are going to do a couple of brief presentations and then an open ended presentation. the first will be michael scherer to give us the landscape of this. i will run their some of the questions we might want to be asking. we will do that pretty quickly. then we will be joined by trevor potter, katherine mangu-ward. many of us have known trevor for many years. katherine mangu-ward is a fellow here. hopefully in addition to moderating she will also provide some provocation which is a
vocational qualifications, and then think about the vision on offer from the conservatives. michael gove. michael gove, who wanted to bring back two-tier academic exams. i remember what that was like. o-levels and cses one whole group of young people written off. we are not going back to those days. michael gove who has contempt for vocational qualifications and has abolished some of the best vocational qualifications our country has. and michael gove who has nothing to say about education to 18. so in education there really is a choice of two futures. education for a narrower and narrower elite, with the conservatives. or a one nation skills system as part of a one nation economy with the next labour government. to be a one nation economy we have to make life just that bit easier for the producers, and that bit harder for the predators. predators and producers, i think one year on people know what i was talking about. you see businesses tell me that the pressure for the fast buck from city investors means they just can't take the long view. they want to plan one year, two years, ten yea
who will lead our panel her >> thank you. nunnelee introduce the people on the panel. michael howe, the chemical co- founder of the 4th estate project and the architect of the platform who bundled enterprises. the focus on influences him driving media coverage of the election 2012. he has a very interesting presentation to make for us. to my immediate left is amy davidson, a senior editor at the "new yorker." she has been there since 1995. next is anna sale, a political reporter for wnyc-radio. she covered the gop primaries. my condolences. she appears on the brian lair show and has contributed to npr, bbc, and pbs. next to her as greg marx, co- editor of our selling state product. if you have seen his riding -- writings, he is doing some interesting commentary on how the campaign is being conducted. finally, my old colleague at newsday. a columnist at newsday and a political analyst for the fox news channel. ellis henican is the author of "home team." and "in the blink of an eye." of stormyvoice i on 2021. about we will give the floor to michael howe and his presentation which wil
of the debate. in 1988, michael dukakis could have had help not looking so cold in his response. >> we have a professor at the george washington university, john sides. when you have those moments that reinforce, either good or for ill, to a candidate, how important or damaging can these be? >> candidate debates in a general election to not move the polls a lot. only in a close race. in general, i think these dramatic moments in debates are not necessarily game changes for the average american voter. >> you wrote, usually the candidates fight to a draw. it is hard in that context to have a stunning victory or a terrible defeat. can you elaborate? >> the candidates spend a lot of time trying to lower their expectations about the performance and portray the other person as this great orator. in reality, the candidates spend a lot of time prepping for the debates and they are very good at it. they have read a lot of material and memorize a lot of material. in that context, it is hard for a candidate to really make a big enough mistake to actually swing opinion too strongly to his opponent. >>
cannot say it is not constitutional, i cannot afford it. michael melina a fascinating case. he is a glass cutter from redding, mass., working as grandparents firm. they only had a few employees, and typically, they will have somebody that works outside of the small business provide the coverage. if your husband is employed by a corporation, you would get the health insurance for the corporation. the small glass cutting firm did not provide health insurance. michael went to the state and said he had been on the health insurance connector, which was this new agency formed for people like him. if you do not get insurance through your company, you do not qualify for government programs. you could go on to the connector, which is like a shopping mall for various insurance programs. he said i have a wife that is out of work, a mortgage, condominium fees, a car payment -- he detailed his expenses, and he said he cannot afford the six ended $28 for my monthly health- insurance -- $620 for my monthly health-insurance premium. if the state said we think you can, and you should buy this program or t
presidential candidate with michael dukakis responded to dan quayle where he said -- dan quayle had brought of john kennedy's name and bentsen was ready with their response saying that he knew john kennedy and he said you are not john kennedy. could see quayle in the background looking victimized. guest: let's take a look at a debate moment back in 2000 with al gore and george w. bush. "washington journa[video clip] >> would you to agree on a national patient's bill of rights? >> absolutely not. there is one bipartisan bill that is now pending in the congress. and the insurance companies support the other bill. they like it because it does not accomplish what needs to be accomplished, to give the decisions back to the doctors and nurses and give -- and let you go to the nearest emergency room. it lets you see a specialist if you need to. it had strong bipartisan support but is being blocked by the republican leadership in the congress and i specifically would like to know whether governor bush will support the dingell-norwood bill. >> do you see the differences between the two of you? >> i
. >> will go to a question from the audience and then go back to twitter. >> michael hogan said he felt -- many of us watch c-span for hours at a time. and cnn, proven by the audience here, do not you think it would be fascinating to say to each candidate -- say what is on your mind. tell us something about yourself for an hour and a half. or an hour. would not get a better insight into the candidates, to just let them talk like that. >> it would draw a small audience. whether 80 million people would sit there for 3 hours -- i would certainly like to see more interactive exchange. we should push the format in that direction. i do not recall who it was, we ought to push the people into a room with a typewriter and see what comes out after four hours. there's certainly an audience for a more deep, intellectual discussion. but, with a sore important about these debates -- there are so many people that watch the debate -- low-interest people that watched the debate. those are the people that would not watch that. >> from twitter -- and maybe you answer this with a little bit of a personal response
-- in "60 minutes." michael wallace points his finger and says you're a dictator. several times he said that. he laughed. after many years, people thought his approach was very smart. it made michael wallace embarrassed. if you do the same thing with xi jinping, it will be a disaster. we need to know this kind of mindset, this kind of experience. that is why what henry kissinger said early on this important. -- is important. it will shape their point of view and their behavior. there is tremendous room for cooperation but also dangerous. >> i think you said they experienced during the cultural revolution hard in this generation. how does this bear out in how they view domestic policies and -- in china? or is not -- that not a factor? >> we cannot really know how they will perform an office because they are not there yet. there have been instances where people, where china was being criticized and he made a sharp response. i have had several conversations with xi and found him an extraordinarily thoughtful person who raised a number of philosophical questions. the problem they face is if you
of people tonight. let's hear from michael, in kentucky, an independent there. what would you be asking if you could? >caller: i am looking in the news media, everywhere, there is not a third party candidates who will be speaking tonight. if it was a third party, i would ask obama and mitt romney, what they would do about toning down the procedures of the tsa that are invasive. also, i do my research on line, mainly. alex jones and gary johnson -- i would ask him what he would do. i wish you were in the debate. thank you for your time. good bye. >> we will be talking to the democratic co-chairman of the commission on presidential debates. we'll ask him about why no third-party is represented on the stage tonight. tonight -- next is a call from eveline in florida, a republican. caller: hi, my name is eveline. i would ask romney as a diehard republican myself, i would ask him, do you think that i am a stupid person to believe that after saying you did not care about 47% of the people that now you say you are going to be the president of 100% of the people, that i am stupid and not to beli
of nato special operations headquarters. let's hear now from michael in stat on lay in a on the republican line. >> caller: thank you for listening. >> host: yes, go ahead, michael. >> caller: it is astonishing to me why we don't put the support behind turkey since turkey supported us. i cannot understand why we don't go in, full guns, and support of ally. that is all i have to say. >> guest: well, michael. we actually have -- the united states has strong support for turkey since clinton and their foreign minister in turkey consulted earlier this week in refons the shelling that cross border shelling into turkey on wednesday. the u.s. strongly supported the meeting of the nato council that reassured turkey that defense commitments from the other members of the alliance were still firm and includes the united states. the u.s. has all along supported and very closely ashrined with turkish policy with regard to the regime and the need for asad to go and end repression. the problem is, that neath are the turks or the united states have been able to, don't have any leverage on assadand no able
is michael. my question is kind of about how they are going to end of defining the boundaries of ats with this case. it seems to me from the hearings, one of the ways they might try to limit this is the nexus to the united states. in this case, the connections seem to be -- the plaintiffs are now living here, found the seidlin year. you feel that is more of the nexus to the u.s. than sosa? or less of one? is this stretching it? is it would then the boundaries the aborted gone before it? -- with than the boundaries that have already gone before it? >> the connection to the united states was less than it is in this case. i did not know if that is the way they're going to go. one of the issues that we have not even touched on is the statute as an alternative to litigation in state courts. everybody agrees that our plan -- there is no question about that. all the same issues would come up in terms of other kinds of problems. there are loads of jurisdictions around the world the exercise -- including the united kingdom and the dutch. one of the questions is, is it better to have these cas
'm going to thank you for coming in turn it over to michael. >> i am the one who knew trevor when he was a lawyer for john mccain which i thought was a very important job. nothing like being a lawyer for stephen colbert. maybe one day i can say i work for comedy central, too. i want to give you a brief overview. at the end of july, we are trying our best to project with the money would come from and what the differences would be in terms of the various sides. the point we're trying to make, one that there is a real difference in political money strategy that they are employing the cycle. the obama campaign is heavily reliant on small dollars, regulated money, contributions under $2,500 from individuals. the campaign has total control over and can spend as they want. the exception your is priorities usa which we were saying maybe would make 60 million earlier. authorities have been saying they wanted to make $100 million. there were not a lot of what the liberal democrats coming forward to give them money. in recent weeks, there has been a little bit of a turnaround. it is nothing com
supporters, 202-585-3880. we want to hear your opinions. the new york sometimes, this is michael cooper, "taking stock of some of the claims and counterclaims." you heard about the tax cut from president obama. people out of quork, that was from romney. "the new york times" has brought their take on it and what they think people should know on these issues. instead of bullet points you can go to nytimes.com if you are interested in reading that for yourself. so last night one of the issues that came up was government subsdepizz of -- government subsidies of companies. here's mitt romney talking about that. >> first of all, the department of energy said tax breaks to oil companies is $2.8 million a year. it's an accounting situation that's been in place for 100 years. in one year, you provided $90 billion in breaks to the green energy world. now, i like green energy as well. but that's about 50 years worth of what oil and gas receives. you say exxon and mobile, actually this goes to drilling. if we get that tax rate from 38% down to 25%, that 2.8 is on the table. of course it's on the ta
,000 jobs in this country. in new jersey, do you know how many? 20,000. michael just talked about the new jersey unemployment rate. we have got hundreds of thousands of people out of work now. do we really want to raise taxes on people now? and of more people out of work? and get rid of reductions and exemptions that john patapsco and. simplify things. >> a question for joe kyrillos. >> congress did away with earmarks. officially. no one has ever wanted them unless they come back to their home district. how would you bring back dollars to new jersey in this environment. and what would you identify as the most pressing new jersey project in need of fiscal funding? >> unfortunately, these guys abuse be earmarked process. there were excessive. and of course now we are at a point with our debt problems that we cannot afford them. so i am going to fight tooth and nail -- within the confines of form and other plans that exist for people to compete. and i am going be very active around the state. we lost a big army base. people all around new jersey. sure where you were in that fight. i did not
to that in order to control your economic destiny you need to control your health. host: michael is a political science major. >> i will begin with the article that ran on "the nation" front- page. why have appointments gone by the wayside in this election? guest: president obama has faced obstruction but has not been as engaged with putting forward judges. by the way, the supreme court today may be years 2% of cases in this country. the docket is growing smaller and smaller, shrinking, and there is an impact of president obama not pushing as many judges through as bush did. the courts are so important, and they should be discussed in this campaign. i hope in this next debate -- it is important that this has gone under the radar. the presidents are not just individuals. they come with advisers. president reagan's nominee robert bork was rejected by the senate for being way out of the mainstream in this country. he did not believe the equal protection clause applies to women. he is opposed to the voting rights act and the silver rights act of 1964. and he believed that corporations are people. h
, senator michael bennett from colorado, who is a newer, younger member who is part of the generation that does not understand why congress works so slowly. on the republican side they added another newcomer to the senate, senator mike johans. they are meeting this week. it is different since congress is on recess, and congress has not been here since early- august. lawmakers are home, campaigning in their states or for their colleagues tried to get majorities shored up in both the house and senate. so, a group is coming into town tomorrow for a meeting off- campus at mount vernon, which is a good place for them to meet if they want to avoid reporters who tend to stop the halls and wait out the meetings to get any little snippets of news. host: from politico this week, how secret is there work? i mean, how much do we know about what they talk about, when they are meeting, and what they're doing? guest: i would say the problems the country and this congress face are known. you could easily look back over many reports and the public and private meetings to understand that most outside o
need to control your health. host: michael is a political science major. >> i will begin with the article that ran on "the nation" frontpage. why have appointments gone by the wayside in this election? guest: president obama has faced obstruction but has not been as engaged with putting forward judges. by the way, the supreme court today may be years 2% of cases in this country. the dog is growing smaller and smaller, shrinking, -- the smaller andgrowing smaller, shrinking, and there is an impact of president obama not pushing as many throughout as bush did. the courts are so important, and they should be discussed in this campaign. i hope in this next debate -- it is important that this has gone under the radar. the presidents are not individual -- not just individuals. they come with advisers. president reagan's nominee robert bork was rejected by the senate for being way out of the mainstream in this country. he did not believe the equal protection clause applies to women. he is opposed to the voting rights act and the silver rights act of 1964. and he believed that co
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)